Miley Cyrus poked fun at Instagram's latest permissions, posting a slew of nearly-nude photos on her account:
Personally, I think the photos aren't nearly as offensive as the ones of her waxing her armpit hair, most particularly the CLOSEUP OF THE WAX WITH THE HAIR IN IT. I'm all for personal hygiene (#DoYou), but hair is pet peeve of mine.
Rachel's deactivation isn't the first time Instagram has punished users. Last March, Instagram was under similar flack for taking down - twice - a photo by poet Rupi Kaur, claiming it was against Instagram's guidelines. The photo was of a woman lying in bed, with a menstrual stain on her sweatpants and sheets:
Rupi argued that Instagram's guidelines don't prohibit photos on menstruation, but they allow, "pages filled with countless photos/accounts where women (so many who are underage) are objectified. pornified. and treated less than human."
What do you think? Is Instagram saving us from pornographic content, or are they being backwards with the type of media they allow? Even further, was Rupi's photo - or Miley's, for that matter - within the restricted guidelines of Instagram? Miley's photos are still up on Instagram, so where is the line drawn on what's "offensive" and should be taken down?
My overall take is if you don't want to see certain types of content, don't follow certain accounts. Don't agree with Rupi, or don't take a liking to Miley's lifestyle? Just hit, "unfollow!" Parental controls are then taken into question with the fact that kids can still look up side-boob shots of Miley and the like, but Instagram isn't the only outlet where people can look up that type of content. Google search images are way more offensive on a regular basis, IMO.
Miley, keep doing you, girlfriend. (P.S., I still follow you - even after the armpit photos.)